It's been disproven once and for all 40 yr ago.Only those with no concept of reality cling to the fantasy that the whole world staged it. They're the same people who cry "faked! fotoshopped!" at every evidence you present them, but feel vindicated by the rumour of a death-bed confession. It takes no amount of effort to point at these new LRO images and cry "fake" as they have for the previous, lower resolution images.

You never disprove a conspiracy, all evidence which disproves it is merely taken as an indication of just how hard they are trying to cover it up. People will (and have) just shout "photoshopped". I swear you could physically take some of these people to the Moon, show them the landing sites, the tracks, and the mirrors and seismometers that were left and they still wouldn't believe you.

"We must try to understand the beginning of the universe on the basis of science. It may be a task beyond us, but we should at least make the attempt" - Stephen Hawking, The Universe in a Nutshell

Conspiracies... No. Just Don't. These are people who get obsessed with one coincidence and can build up a "theory" around that one obscure detail in a matter of hours and it's a freaking cult the next day. Thank you internets, for letting the nutjobs congregate that much faster.

It's one of those 'cannot be unseen' type of things(or like the movie Inception), where once an idea takes hold you see the evidence of it in everything and continuously build up the little scraps of mysterious data, convoluting the facts until you can't see but your own conspiracy.

And if any new evidence will pop up, you can just harness the power of the dozens of previous datascraps to identify a singular similarity between them and either dismiss it as a proof of the conpirators trying to hide it or as something that makes your castle in the clouds that much more solid.

From an example earlier this week: I ventured to the parts of YT where madness lies, ie. the water car videos. Stating as a problem to one of those videos, that hydrogen is volatile as fuck, you can't store it as safely as gasoline. I think I linked a video of a hydrogen balloon being blown up(spectacular energy output).

The response was(paraphrasing): "Oh no, we just use hydrogen gas, not HHO! Hydrogen is very stable, safer than gasoline!"

Haven't gotten an answer back yet, when I pointed out to the "professor" that in order to burn hydrogen, you still need the oxygen, ie. You'll be using 2H and an O in there somewhere anyway.

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe." - Albert Einstein